Auditor’s ruling renews calls for early voting funds

When Massachusetts offered early voting for the first time this past November, cities and towns footed the majority of the bill.

When Massachusetts offered early voting for the first time this past November, cities and towns footed the majority of the bill.

State Auditor Suzanne Bump, however, issued a recent determination that some of the requirements in the early voting law amount to an “unfunded mandate” and the state government should provide more funding.

“The early voting law certainly is to be regarded a success,” Bump said in a statement. “It did, however, mandate new procedures for clerks. Some of these should be paid for by the state, not municipalities according to the Local Mandate Law.”

The state’s early voting law, which allowed voters to cast ballots in person during a 12-day window before the presidential election, was popular with many voters. About one-third of Massachusetts presidential ballots were cast by early voters, according to the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office.

“The Massachusetts Town Clerks’ Association is pleased that the state auditor has determined that portions of the early voting law constitute a mandate,” said Northborough Town Clerk Andrew Dowd, president of the statewide association. “It is our hope that the state Legislature will fund the mandated costs, providing reimbursement to communities.”

Cities and towns statewide spent more than twice as much on optional early voting services than on mandatory requirements in the law, pushing total spending to more than $2.5 million.

Given that the mandated portions of the early voting requirements amounted to a few thousand dollars for most communities, voting rights advocate Pam Wilmot, executive director of the government accountability group Common Cause Massachusetts, characterized the issue as “a little bit of a tempest in a teapot.”

Statewide, the auditor’s office estimates communities spent a combined total of $719,708 to comply with mandates included in new early voting requirements. Minimum standards in the new law included offering early voting by mail and having one in-person location available during normal business hours.

Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin’s office offered early voting grants ranging from $250-$2,000, depending on the size of the community and the number of early voting locations and hours it was offering. The grants were funded through a $400,000 allocation from the state Legislature, but weren’t enough to cover all mandated costs.

Many communities went above and beyond the minimum requirements of the law, offering multiple early voting locations and staying open during evening and weekend hours. Bump’s office estimates municipal spending on early voting options not required by law amounted to more than $1.9 million.

“The Legislature knew what they were doing,” said Brookline Town Clerk Patrick Ward. “They knew they were creating a sea change in electoral administration, and they were doing it on the cheap. They were putting the burden on communities.”

Brookline spent $6,002 to comply with mandated early voting requirements, and $23,178 on other early voting services the auditor’s office deemed “optional.”

“Some did it the right way and some did it the way the law said,” Ward said.

He said he fully committed to early voting and was heartened to see many senior citizens and people with disabilities cast their ballots early.

The Brookline clerk explained he felt the minimum requirements in the early voting law were insufficient to meet Brookline’s needs. The town offered multiple locations and expanded hours. Although not required by law, Brookline had a police officer present at early voting sites. Additional staff was needed, Ward said, to process all the early ballots.

“The average lay person doesn’t understand the preparation involved in a presidential election and how busy our offices are,” Ward said. “Then, in the midst of that, to throw in these exceptional hours for early voting, and to think that’s not going to cost money, is ridiculous.”

The state auditor’s office began examining early voting mandates this fall after officials in Woburn and Oxford filed petitions with the office. With the determination that some of the early voting costs represent an unfunded mandate, cities and towns now have an option of seeking court-ordered exemptions from the the next round of early voting until state funding is provided.

“Suing in court is probably going to cost more money than they would recoup,” Wilmot said.

Since the auditor’s office’s Division of Local Mandates was created in 1980, it has issued 436 determinations on unfunded mandates, finding in favor of cities and towns 79 times. That has resulted in $343 million in state funding or other remediation being provided to the communities, according to Bump’s office.

For instance, in 2012, the office determined a requirement that school districts provide transportation for homeless students who’ve been relocated to another community was an unfunded mandate.

Newton City Clerk David Olson said early voting was successful and well-received. To make it accessible to as many voters as it could, Newton opted to offer multiple early voting locations and expanded hours.

“It was an additional expense, and we knew that going in,” Olson said.

Newton’s mandated early voting expenses were $8,000, and the city spent an additional $46,695 on expanded early voting services. Like Brookline, Newton got a maximum grant of $2,000 from Galvin’s office to help cover the costs.

Costs not covered by the grants came out of municipal budgets. Many advocates of the early voting law said cities and towns had ample opportunities to plan for the new system.

“Yes, there were definitely local mandates in this, and getting some reimbursement from the state would be a help in continuing to offer early voting,” Olson said. “I think there should be more assistance from the state.”

He hopes Bump’s determination will help municipal governments make a case for more funds.

“What’s been determined is a good start, and it would be nice to have some additional funding,” Olson said.

Dowd, the president of the Massachusetts Town Clerks’ Association, said that while he views early voting as “extremely successful,” the association will advocate for amendments to the law to reduce the financial impact to cities and towns. There is still some time to do that.. The early voting law requires that voters be allowed to cast their ballots early in presidential and statewide elections. The next statewide election is in November 2018, when Massachusetts will vote for governor and other state offices.

“While the cost of conducting early voting sessions was not overwhelming in most communities, it did impact already-tight budgets,” he said.